On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 21:35 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 21:23 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Why is this code being handled in this half-assed way? Can't Intel, > > > Tungsten, Dell, Ubuntu and whoever just pull together and put it in > > > X.org and the kernel like a sane and actually-useful driver should be? > > > > That would be nice - I know some people who went through similar confusion > > a few months ago, and were told by Intel engineers that the > > xf86-video-vermilion that Tungsten contributed to Xorg & DRI about 9 months > > ago is actually the Poulsbo driver, though nowhere else can you find that > > name for it. I never followed up to see if that worked for them on their > > hardware or not. > > I think you're hitting the old "was it really that long ago?" trap :) > > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-vermilion/ > > Initial commit is dated 2007/03/28 - so *a year* and nine months ago. > I've also read that it's probably the same driver, but even so, it > doesn't help, as it'll be an even earlier version of the code than the > one in Moblin git, which doesn't work. Never mind the one in Ubuntu's > repos. Which also doesn't work (on anything but one specific version of > Ubuntu). > > The 'vermilion' code hasn't been touched in any meaningful way since > April 2007.
Just to confirm that vermilion is NOT the driver for Poulsbo (US15W). It's a completely separate device. Alan. _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
